4 ms·
Very well put. I already found disgusting what AWS did with Dynamodb (adding key-eviction, etc as a catch-up with MDB) but this is even more hideous.
by fogetti 8y ago
Very well put. I already found disgusting what AWS did with Dynamodb (adding key-eviction, etc as a catch-up with MDB) but this is even more hideous.
- whoisjuan 8y agoMongoDB has a terrible reputation when it comes to scalability and support. If you search you can find a bunch of horror stories. I don't have any angle to condemn or support this move, but it definitely seems like a response to what AWS customers and the market were asking for: "Give us a managed MongoDB or MongoDB-like service that doesn't suck"
- fogetti 8y agoI find a bunch of horror stories about DynamoDB and PostgreSQL too. Your point is? How is that even related to the fact that AWS is basically piggybacking on MongoDB-s R&D effort and brand recognition? Also it's clear that you have zero knowledge about Mongodb hosted services. Because otherwise you would know that very good supported hosted services exist which are 100% compatible with AWS (beside MDB Atlas).
- yjftsjthsd-h 8y agoYou found it disgusting that a software vendor decided to implement features in order to match competitors in the space? That's... how product development works.
- fogetti 8y agoThat's just the tip of the iceberg. I am not gonna repeat myself. Read my previous comments on the topic.